Com. v. Dickens, J.
Com. v. Dickens, J. No. 568 MDA 2016
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Feb 14, 2017Background
- Jeremy Devon Dickens, an inmate at SCI Benner Township, was found with marijuana and heroin in his cell on April 2, 2015; corrections officers seized the contraband and placed him in restrictive housing.
- Trooper Jeffrey Ebeck interviewed Dickens at the prison, read Miranda warnings, and Dickens waived rights and made incriminating statements about participating in a prison drug distribution ring during a ~20-minute interview.
- Dickens was charged June 9, 2015 with two counts of possession of a controlled substance/contraband by an inmate (18 Pa.C.S. § 5123(a)(2)); he filed suppression motions challenging his statements and the seized evidence.
- The trial court held suppression hearings, denied two of the three suppression motions, and issued an opinion denying the omnibus pretrial motion the same day Dickens pled guilty pursuant to a negotiated plea on March 29, 2016.
- Dickens’s written and oral guilty plea colloquies acknowledged that pleading guilty waives most appeal rights except jurisdiction, plea validity, ineffective assistance, or illegality of the sentence; he did not file post-sentence motions but filed a timely appeal and Pa.R.A.P. 1925(b) statement.
- On appeal Dickens challenged arraignment procedures and the denial of suppression; the Superior Court concluded his challenges were waived by the guilty plea and, alternatively, rejected the voluntariness argument on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Dickens’s guilty plea waived his challenges to arraignment and suppression rulings | Dickens argued he reasonably expected to appeal suppression because the trial judge said he would make the suppression denial a final order | Commonwealth argued guilty plea waived all non-jurisdictional, non-plea-validity, non-ineffective-assistance, non-illegal-sentence issues | Waiver applies: plea waived those claims; appeal of suppression and arraignment issues denied as waived |
| Whether the suppression court erred in denying motion to suppress Dickens’s statement as involuntary | Dickens argued statement was coerced by trooper’s comments and presence of correctional officers | Commonwealth argued Trooper Ebeck read Miranda, Dickens waived rights knowingly, and interview was brief and non-coercive | On the merits, confession was voluntary under totality of circumstances; suppression denial upheld |
| Whether presence of corrections officers rendered any inmate confession per se involuntary | Dickens contended officers’ presence coerced confession | Commonwealth said mere presence of officers in a prison interrogation does not automatically vitiate voluntariness | Court rejected per se rule; officer presence alone did not show coercion |
| Whether trial court’s post-plea action (making suppression denial final) estopped enforcement of waiver | Dickens argued judge’s statement gave him an expectation to appeal suppression | Commonwealth noted plea waiver doctrine controls regardless of trial-court statements | Expectation did not overcome plea-waiver rule; waiver prevailed |
Key Cases Cited
- Commonwealth v. Eisenberg, 98 A.3d 1268 (Pa. 2014) (guilty plea waives claims except limited categories)
- Commonwealth v. Mitchell, 105 A.3d 1257 (Pa. 2014) (voluntariness of confession reviewed under totality of circumstances)
- Commonwealth v. Sepulveda, 55 A.3d 1108 (Pa. 2012) (discussing coercive interrogation standards)
- Commonwealth v. Jones, 121 A.3d 524 (Pa. Super. 2015) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
- Commonwealth v. Santiago, 978 A.2d 349 (Pa. 2009) (Anders/McClendon procedure for counsel withdrawal in frivolous-appeal contexts)
- Commonwealth v. Wrecks, 931 A.2d 717 (Pa. Super. 2007) (remand for briefing where non-frivolous issues exist)